KEY VOTE: “NO” on the "Udall Amendment"

KEY VOTE: Senate · Jun 27, 2019

Heritage Action opposes The “Udall Amendment” and will include it as a key vote on our legislative scorecard.

This Friday, the Senate will vote on an amendment introduced by Senators Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) to the Fiscal Year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would prohibit funds from being used to conduct hostilities against the Government of Iran, against the Armed Forces of Iran, or in the territories of Iran.

This amendment would restrict the President’s ability to exercise his core executive functions as commander-in-chief under Article II of the Constitution and undermine the President’s ability to swiftly respond to acts of aggression against U.S. interests from the Iranian regime.

If Congress desires to exercise its Article I powers not to authorize the use of military force, that is within their right; however, this amendment hamstrings the commander-in-chief’s constitutional duty to defend the country by failing to clearly define “hostilities.”

As written, the amendment would prohibit the use of funds to conduct hostilities against the Government of Iran, against the Armed Forces of Iran, or in the territory of Iran. The word “hostilities” is capacious, and could include offensive cyber activities or other measures deemed proportionate by the president, who, under Article II of the Constitution, is the commander-in-chief. And although Section (b)(1) recognizes our inherent right of self-defense against an attack upon the United States, its territories, possessions, or armed forces, the amendment provides no guidance or definition with respect to the term “hostilities,” and thus infringes upon the core powers of the president under Article II to protect and defend the United States. The failure to define “hostilities” also creates a dangerous set of rules of engagement for troops on the ground.

The amendment would also send a dangerous signal to Iran that the United States is not serious about protecting its interests in the region at a time of increasing hostility. This is unacceptable. Iran needs to be aware that any antagonistic acts against the United States will be met with whatever response necessary to protect Americans and American interests and deter future aggression.

According to James Phillips, Senior Research fellow at The Heritage Foundation:

Iran’s June 19, 2019, shoot-down of a U.S. Navy surveillance drone near the Strait of Hormuz, and a series of attacks on ships in the Gulf of Oman off Iran’s coast, have ratcheted up tensions between Iran and the United States. Such asymmetric tactics are the opening skirmish in what is likely to be a protracted and intensifying crisis over Iran’s escalating uranium enrichment. The U.S. and its allies need to respond effectively to Iran’s covert maritime threats, and as they do so, they should bear in mind that Iran’s most potent threat is on the nuclear front.

As various threats to the United States continue to emerge, the President must have the flexibility to address these threats by whatever means necessary. The practice of exercising executive power during military operations has taken place throughout history, and now is not the time to limit the president’s ability to do what is best for our country. All senators should oppose the Udall amendment.